Not if they agreed to unlimited bandwidth on a 50:1 contention (e.g like lots of ADSL providers).
Of course, almost every ISP has 'acceptable usage' crap these days which means they weasel on that one too, if you download more than they think's fair.
There's quite a few ISPs who love to use such things as 'contention'. Which is overloading their bandwidth. DSL is obviously this way, but even on the backbone, you probably don't have enough bandwidth for everyone to be using their max all at once.
You're probably ok. I patched last night, and DID reboot. No boot.ini, but C:\windows is on my first partition on my first HDD, so it just boots anyway. I'll create a new one when I get home
I think my config is probably about what you'd get from your 'average' knows nothing about PCs user, too. People with multiboot setups, or some other exciting disk layout, I'd hope know enough about their system to fix this anyway.
It doesn't replace it - the 'new' boot.ini ends up in the right place. It just deletes it, because whoever tweaked the installer typoed and did 'delete \boot.ini' rather than 'delete.\boot.ini'. or something like that.
No, you're not.
Because I did it, lost my boot.ini, and my copy of XP started up just fine without it. I presume it flashed up a 'missing boot.ini' message, but I didn't spot it.
I only even checked because of the forum flames, and sure enough, it's not there.
If you're doing some kind of funky multiboot thing, then yeah, sure, you'll have a problem. However if you are, and you don't know how to fix it, then... well, you were going to have problems sooner or later anyway.
If you don't install your games to C: you're fine.
If you've got a 'basic' OS install, e.g. C:\WINDOWS and one partition, you're fine - the boostrap loader guesses, flashes up an error, and boots anyway.
It's a bit of a fubar, but hardly the next apocalypse.
I really loved the 'metagame integration' that they pulled in bioshock. It was just such an elegant reason for _why_ you were doing all these quests, that I still smirk when I think about it today. And use the 'key' phrase when talking to workmates around the office. One or two notice:)
It's a fairly common problem in universities - they want more money, therefore they rip off their students via the bookshop. I mean, you don't _have_ to buy there. It's just most seem to assume that university bookshop will be reselling course books (especially ones written by the professors of that university) at a good price.
In practice, I ran into several lecturers and professors that recommended XYZ book from the university bookshop, only to find it was them who wrote it, and were therefore presumably getting royalties out of it. And of course, paying 'full price' at the university bookshop, when it'd have been much cheaper elsewhere.
Whilst I have no doubt that professor of a subject, is a good person to write a book on a subject, and therefore use it as course material, it somehow seems... well, a bit smelly to have 'required reading' that goes straight into their back pocket.
The pedant in me needs to point out that ISBN stands for International Standard Book Number. Therefore referring to an "ISBN number" is redundant. Much like LCD displays, and PIN numbers.
Well implemented security is a good thing. I've very rarely seen well implemented security. I've seen many situations where IT security has been 'heavy handed' dumped rules and policies all over the place, and just made the whole system painful to use.
For example, at the moment, we have password rules enforcement. 8+ characters, non-alpha, and a few other requirements. I've got 5 accounts, for different systems, and domains. And the password expiry is 30 days. Which means after two weeks I start to get 'password expiring' warnings.
So, of course, every two weeks, I end up having to pick 5 new passwords. As you might imagine, this leads to some vaguely bad behaviour regarding 'cycling' the password pattern I tend to use, and also leads to me locking out my account rather frequently, as I have to keep the whole lot 'in sync'. Our users have similar problems, albeit on a somewhat smaller scale. So guess what. Post-it notes everywhere, because people can't remember.
Now, you _can_ do passwording security right. But it's not by forcing people into remembering 34 character passwords, that aren't dictionary/alphanumeric, and they have to change it every two weeks. That leads to people circumventing them.
I felt badly ripped off by those endings. Deus Ex Machina went out of fashion in ancient greece, because even at that point, they realised it was lame.
I mean, seriously. Endings may be tough, but... hell even 'rocks fall, everyone dies' would have been a better finale than... well, what we got.
Thankfully, Pandora's Star/Judas Unchained, he's maybe learned his lesson. There is an ending. It's... well, not _great_ but eminently credible, with some basis all the way through. I still don't know quite why he sent someone off wandering pathways, for no discernible reason, but... well, most of the story is fairly solid. His 'concept' of a believable fantasy world is just superb. I really loved the whole nanonics/affinity stuff, and thought it was really superb. But... yeah. I could rant all day. I won't. But it's just as well he did actually end gracefully, as I might have had to go and violence his boats otherwise.
Technically speaking, the kind of 'thing' sufficient to propel really big ass spaceships at 1G, if pointed towards... well pretty much anything, would probably count as 'being rather hostile'. Lasers, fusion drives, or just plain chemical rockets.
But given my laser pointer doesn't even move specks of dust, I suspect that this laser will be the kind that blinds everyone in line of sight. Which given it's heading for high orbit, is rather a lot of them.
No not at all. However I remain bemused at the world going 'oooh wow, hydrogen and electric cars' whilst at the same time completely failing to recognise that more pollution is generated by the clean solutions.
You're correct. People posted the difference in efficiency. 20% vs 40%, or twice as much energy yield for a given quantity of fuel. But that's only on the primary reaction. Which'd mean that between the other steps involved in running this hydrogen car - electricity distribution, electrolysis, and actually running the engine itself, if that process chain is less than 50% efficient, this hydrogen power doesn't help. And given we've established about a 20% efficiency margin on the petrol engine, does it seem likely to you that the hydrogen engine is any more efficient?
We live in a world where the actual cost to the end user is the only real motivator. Well, more strictly, the overall impact on the corporate bottom line. After all, all the 'rest' is easy to fob off as someone elses problem. It _will_ take us hitting the point of serious impact to our day to day lives before many people will bother to actually do any more than complain that 'someone else' should be sorting it.
If we assume that the hydrogen burning is a similar level of efficiency when running an engine, then we're using a hell of a lot more energy to run this car on hydrogen than anything else. Petrol -> automotive power is a direct energy conversion, so ok, 20% efficient. Fuel -> electricity -> hydrogen -> automotive power on the other hand strikes me as being a really good way to use a lot of energy.
I think I had this discussion regarding electric cars, which is where I may have garbled my original post. Multiple energy conversions mean that running a car off a power station, be it via batteries or hydrogen, just means more fuel is used overall.
You're correct in saying that nuclear power is really the only (medium term) solution. Sadly there's far too many people who don't want nuclear power in their back yard.
But on one hand you have fuel going in to a car, and getting used directly. On the other, you have fuel going to a power station, being converted to electricity, then being used to electrolyse water for hydrogen, which is then being used in the car. I wouldn't be at all suprised to find more net fuel was used per 'mile' of hydrogen power, than just using petrol.
Operating cost is one thing. I'd be interested in finding out whether it's actually more or less pollution, once you factor in the need to 'manufacture' the hydrogen from existing power stations.
Well, much like electric cars, I'm wondering: Does this actually help? I mean, petroleum burning is actually fairly energy efficient. OK, so you pollute a bit. But... so do power stations. And last I checked, your average power station, producing hundreds of mega watts, is actually substantially less efficient than a (relatively) small petrol engine.
So, you're presumably using rather a lot of oil, coal or natural gas, in order to make these things run. Is that actually helping our environment at all? Or are they looking at some other reason to do it, like making them able to go really really far?
Yeah, I know there's nuclear, solar, geothermal, and wind power available. Fact remains that these are all way more expensive than burning fossil fuels, otherwise we'd have switches _ages_ ago.
I'm pretty sure that mobiles contain some kind of documentation in the manual that more or less says 'don't rely on these in an emergency'. The reason being? Well, the phones themselves, have potential reception problems. They rely on batteries. The base stations are also going to lose power in a powercut, where a telephone line is powered from the exchange (which I believe has certain rules on being able to carry emergency calls in an emergency, so has everything on backed up power).
I loved being a projectionist at student cinema for exactly these reasons. We had the films, in cans, in the projector room. So, 'private ish' screening happened for other people in the know. It really was lovely to have a whole auditorium to yourself on a saturday afternoon, drinkin' beer and watching that film you wanted to. And 'pausing' it if you need to go get a replacement.
.
Well, 'pause' isn't really an option, but you can stop the projector and miss a 'little bit', or if you're doing it the hard way and changing reels every 20 minutes, you just stop there...
And our projection standards were better than most commercial cinemas. Ugh, the number of times I've seen sloppy job of projection work, and I _know_ I can do it better than that. (seriously, is it really that hard to get the damn things in focus? Wait, no it's not, you just have to bother to do it).
Only student society that actually turned a profit too. Showing 'good but not brand new' films on 7 shows a week (weekday evenings, sometimes double shows, sometimes not) at 'student' pricing did quite well. At least, well enough that our toys were good enough to make the cinema junkies in the group drool.
Ah bliss. Home Cinema? Pah. Nothing beats the 40ft screen, and 'auditorium filling' sound system, when you get to control playback, films and volume yourself.
Hmm, the thought occurs though, that this could be an interesting tack to take. Pirated film 'honesty box' where you donate a 'fair price' when you've watched a pirated film.
Don't necessarily see why anonimity is necessary either (although, I guess it does set you up as a target - watched pirate film, even if paid for, means must be an evil pirating scum)
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, almost every ISP has 'acceptable usage' crap these days which means they weasel on that one too, if you download more than they think's fair.
So... it is having a knock on effect.
You're probably ok. I patched last night, and DID reboot. No boot.ini, but C:\windows is on my first partition on my first HDD, so it just boots anyway.
I'll create a new one when I get home
I think my config is probably about what you'd get from your 'average' knows nothing about PCs user, too. People with multiboot setups, or some other exciting disk layout, I'd hope know enough about their system to fix this anyway.
It doesn't replace it - the 'new' boot.ini ends up in the right place. It just deletes it, because whoever tweaked the installer typoed and did 'delete \boot.ini' rather than 'delete .\boot.ini'. or something like that.
If the person in question had actually posted it to the "game development" forum, or better yet, filed a bug report, then I might agree.
No, you're not. ... well, you were going to have problems sooner or later anyway.
Because I did it, lost my boot.ini, and my copy of XP started up just fine without it. I presume it flashed up a 'missing boot.ini' message, but I didn't spot it.
I only even checked because of the forum flames, and sure enough, it's not there.
If you're doing some kind of funky multiboot thing, then yeah, sure, you'll have a problem. However if you are, and you don't know how to fix it, then
If you don't install your games to C: you're fine.
If you've got a 'basic' OS install, e.g. C:\WINDOWS and one partition, you're fine - the boostrap loader guesses, flashes up an error, and boots anyway.
It's a bit of a fubar, but hardly the next apocalypse.
There's a reason seatbelts exist.
I really loved the 'metagame integration' that they pulled in bioshock. It was just such an elegant reason for _why_ you were doing all these quests, that I still smirk when I think about it today. And use the 'key' phrase when talking to workmates around the office. One or two notice :)
In practice, I ran into several lecturers and professors that recommended XYZ book from the university bookshop, only to find it was them who wrote it, and were therefore presumably getting royalties out of it. And of course, paying 'full price' at the university bookshop, when it'd have been much cheaper elsewhere.
Whilst I have no doubt that professor of a subject, is a good person to write a book on a subject, and therefore use it as course material, it somehow seems ... well, a bit smelly to have 'required reading' that goes straight into their back pocket.
The pedant in me needs to point out that ISBN stands for International Standard Book Number. Therefore referring to an "ISBN number" is redundant. Much like LCD displays, and PIN numbers.
For example, at the moment, we have password rules enforcement. 8+ characters, non-alpha, and a few other requirements. I've got 5 accounts, for different systems, and domains. And the password expiry is 30 days. Which means after two weeks I start to get 'password expiring' warnings.
So, of course, every two weeks, I end up having to pick 5 new passwords. As you might imagine, this leads to some vaguely bad behaviour regarding 'cycling' the password pattern I tend to use, and also leads to me locking out my account rather frequently, as I have to keep the whole lot 'in sync'. Our users have similar problems, albeit on a somewhat smaller scale. So guess what. Post-it notes everywhere, because people can't remember.
Now, you _can_ do passwording security right. But it's not by forcing people into remembering 34 character passwords, that aren't dictionary/alphanumeric, and they have to change it every two weeks. That leads to people circumventing them.
I mean, seriously. Endings may be tough, but ... hell even 'rocks fall, everyone dies' would have been a better finale than ... well, what we got.
Thankfully, Pandora's Star/Judas Unchained, he's maybe learned his lesson. There is an ending. It's ... well, not _great_ but eminently credible, with some basis all the way through. I still don't know quite why he sent someone off wandering pathways, for no discernible reason, but ... well, most of the story is fairly solid. His 'concept' of a believable fantasy world is just superb. I really loved the whole nanonics/affinity stuff, and thought it was really superb. But ... yeah. I could rant all day. I won't. But it's just as well he did actually end gracefully, as I might have had to go and violence his boats otherwise.
Technically speaking, the kind of 'thing' sufficient to propel really big ass spaceships at 1G, if pointed towards... well pretty much anything, would probably count as 'being rather hostile'. Lasers, fusion drives, or just plain chemical rockets.
But given my laser pointer doesn't even move specks of dust, I suspect that this laser will be the kind that blinds everyone in line of sight. Which given it's heading for high orbit, is rather a lot of them.
1000 in base 2 isn't 1024 :). It's 8.
Kilo = 1000 = 10^3
Kilo in computing terms = 2^10
You're correct. People posted the difference in efficiency. 20% vs 40%, or twice as much energy yield for a given quantity of fuel. But that's only on the primary reaction. Which'd mean that between the other steps involved in running this hydrogen car - electricity distribution, electrolysis, and actually running the engine itself, if that process chain is less than 50% efficient, this hydrogen power doesn't help. And given we've established about a 20% efficiency margin on the petrol engine, does it seem likely to you that the hydrogen engine is any more efficient?
We live in a world where the actual cost to the end user is the only real motivator. Well, more strictly, the overall impact on the corporate bottom line. After all, all the 'rest' is easy to fob off as someone elses problem. It _will_ take us hitting the point of serious impact to our day to day lives before many people will bother to actually do any more than complain that 'someone else' should be sorting it.
I think I had this discussion regarding electric cars, which is where I may have garbled my original post. Multiple energy conversions mean that running a car off a power station, be it via batteries or hydrogen, just means more fuel is used overall.
You're correct in saying that nuclear power is really the only (medium term) solution. Sadly there's far too many people who don't want nuclear power in their back yard.
But on one hand you have fuel going in to a car, and getting used directly. On the other, you have fuel going to a power station, being converted to electricity, then being used to electrolyse water for hydrogen, which is then being used in the car. I wouldn't be at all suprised to find more net fuel was used per 'mile' of hydrogen power, than just using petrol.
Operating cost is one thing. I'd be interested in finding out whether it's actually more or less pollution, once you factor in the need to 'manufacture' the hydrogen from existing power stations.
So, you're presumably using rather a lot of oil, coal or natural gas, in order to make these things run. Is that actually helping our environment at all? Or are they looking at some other reason to do it, like making them able to go really really far?
Yeah, I know there's nuclear, solar, geothermal, and wind power available. Fact remains that these are all way more expensive than burning fossil fuels, otherwise we'd have switches _ages_ ago.
I'm pretty sure that mobiles contain some kind of documentation in the manual that more or less says 'don't rely on these in an emergency'. The reason being? Well, the phones themselves, have potential reception problems. They rely on batteries. The base stations are also going to lose power in a powercut, where a telephone line is powered from the exchange (which I believe has certain rules on being able to carry emergency calls in an emergency, so has everything on backed up power).
. Well, 'pause' isn't really an option, but you can stop the projector and miss a 'little bit', or if you're doing it the hard way and changing reels every 20 minutes, you just stop there...
And our projection standards were better than most commercial cinemas. Ugh, the number of times I've seen sloppy job of projection work, and I _know_ I can do it better than that. (seriously, is it really that hard to get the damn things in focus? Wait, no it's not, you just have to bother to do it).
Only student society that actually turned a profit too. Showing 'good but not brand new' films on 7 shows a week (weekday evenings, sometimes double shows, sometimes not) at 'student' pricing did quite well. At least, well enough that our toys were good enough to make the cinema junkies in the group drool.
Ah bliss. Home Cinema? Pah. Nothing beats the 40ft screen, and 'auditorium filling' sound system, when you get to control playback, films and volume yourself.
Don't necessarily see why anonimity is necessary either (although, I guess it does set you up as a target - watched pirate film, even if paid for, means must be an evil pirating scum)